The Abilene reflector. [volume] (Abilene, Kan.) 1883-1888, 1887-07-28
AS TO TRADE SECRETS.
A Question OF Ethics Which Has Cause
Considerable DiScussIon.

A Question of Ethics Which Has Caused
Considerable DIscussIoh.
The statemcnt.tbat the secret of the
manufacture of Russia iron has been
finally learned, and that mill for its
manufacture is to be shortly erected in
Pennsylvania. raises Il question of ethics
about which there may be considerable
discussion. The fairest way is to adj
nit that the secret was stolen from it,
posscssors in Russia, and on that basis,
to determine whether there is any prin.
ciple, legal or moral, which should in
tcrfere with thus obtaining the knowl
edge requisite to c;ury on particular
industry.
The question of legal barrier may
be dismissed at once. The invention
was certainly not protected by the pat
ent laws of the United States, and there
is nothing in any treaty with Russi:
which preserves trade secrets from i'll
quisitive Americans in Russia or pryine
Russians in America. If Russian me
rhanic should come over here and
carry back with him the patterns of 8
sewing machine. or Colts revolver,
or any other American invention, there
is no law to prevent his manufacturing
and selling them in Russia, if he so de.
sires-so that any legal objection fall.
to the ground.
But how about the question Of mora
delinquency? Let us see. Princess
Demidoff was the posseSsor of certain
technical knowledge by means of which
she made the product known as Russls
iron. Il valuable article of merchandise
and of great intrinsic value. inasmuch
as it is impervious to rnst. Mr.. Rogers.
an 8 merican i'll Russia, gains admission
to the mills of Princess Demidof' and
while there, without any charge against
him of hiring employees or any under
hanGed work, he learns the secret of
the process. What fault has he COM
mitted? He was under no obligations
to the Princess Demiuoff. He commit
ted no breach of trust, for there had
been no confidential relation created.
He did not deprive the Princess of her
knowledge of the process. for she knows
Just as much about it as she did before.
All that he did was To possess himself,
by his superior shrewdness and acu-
men. of a technical knowledge which it
was sought to keep a secret.
1t is question whether there can
rightfully be any monopoly of any use
full knowledge or Invention. and some
moralistS even inveigh against patent
laws upon the ground that the sum of
all knowledge belongs to the whole
human family. and that to secure the
manufacture and sale Of any useful
article to an Individual is subversiye of
the governmental principle of the
greatest good for the greatest number.
But, however this may be, it is evident
that the moral sense of civilized na-
tions does not recognize any sanctity
in trade secrets as such. but the laws
require the secret TO be disclosed be-
fore it can be protected by law. II an
inventor declines to patent his inven-
ton, he takes his chances upon it be-
ing rediscovered or even stolen by some
one else. Such is the secret in En-
gland of dying sealskins. 1t has been
handed down in one firm for many
wears. and is unpatentod, because, il
patented, it must in time become public
property. and its holders run the risk
of its being discovered.
That is the true rule in regard to
trade secrets. They are the property
of the holder just so long rs he can
keep his peculiar knowledge to himself;
but he has no right to object if some
one else can get from him that knowl-
edge which it Is his business to protect.
If some other American can get from
Mr.. Rodgers the secret which he ac-
quired in Russia, he will have no cause
for complaint; for in trade secrets the
only principle is the good old rule.
the simple plan. that they should keep
who get the power. and they should get
who can. San FrdIlrtsco ChroBicis.